Use of Gamified Digital Tools in Daily Tasks of Health Care Workers: Scoping Review
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background: The quality and effectiveness of health care service delivery are significantly influenced by the engagement and motivation of health care workers. Integrating gamified digital tools (GDTs) into health care workers' workflows presents a promising approach to enhancing them. However, there is currently a lack of evidence supporting the implementation of such interventions. Objective: This scoping review aims to summarize existing evidence on the influence of GDTs on the daily tasks of health care workers. Methods: A scoping review was conducted following the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews) guidelines for scoping reviews. We conducted a comprehensive search across different databases (PubMed, EMBASE, International Journal of Serious Games, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar) for peer-reviewed studies and (OpenAlex, GreyNet, and IEEE Xplore) for gray literature published between January 2010 and January 2024. Eligibility criteria, developed using the SPIDER (Sample, Phenomenon of Interest, Design, Evaluation, and Research) framework, included qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods studies involving health care workers using GDTs for daily tasks. Studies in English, French, Spanish, or Italian were eligible. Keywords and medical subject headings related to gamification and health care workers were used. The studies were screened, eligibility was assessed, and data were extracted. A narrative synthesis was used to summarize and interpret the findings. Results: Of 5844 studies, 12 met the inclusion criteria and were included in the analysis. These studies exhibited considerable heterogeneity in the application of gamification. Feedback, competition, and dashboard features were the most common gamification elements identified. The implementation of these elements led to enhanced engagement, increased motivation, improved task completion, and promoted healthy competition among staff across various health care settings. Conclusions: Integrating GDTs into health care workers' tasks holds significant potential to enhance engagement and motivation. However, empirical evidence is still lacking. Comparative studies are needed to gain comprehensive insights into the benefits and limitations of gamification in health care.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,003 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».